About your Search

20121204
20121204
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
is that the options for the obama administration in syria would remain somewhat limited. the movement of these weapons all known to u.s. intelligence was first reported in the "new york times." officials confirmed it to fox news if president assad uses these weapons, american retaliatory options could range from subversive covert actions to the arming of syrian rebels to the direct use of force. >> their actions against their own people have been tragic but there is no doubt that there is line between even the horrors that they have already inflicted on the syrian people and moving to what would be internationally condemned step of utilizing their chemical weapons. >> that was secretary clinton speaking in prague today but keeping it vague as you saw shep as to what washington might do about it. >> this isn't the first time that the president and the secretary of state have drawn this red line. >> no, it's not. and critics of the obama administration warn that setting such a high bar to greater u.s. involvement in that conflict, namely the waging of chemical war by a nation against its own citizenry c
from the paralyzing effects of the toxin. this new intelligence has the obama administration so concerned, harsh warnings came from the president himself. >> i want to make it absolutely clear to assad and those under his command the world is watching. the use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable. if you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons, there will be consequences, and you will be held accountable. >> reporter: a senior official tells abc news there are contingency plans for military action if the weapons became a threat. the syrian regime said it would not use chemical weapons under any circumstance, but president ass assad's father used them, and assad himself has been massacring his citizens for nearly two straight years. martha raddatz, abc news, washington. >> it's a little hard to believe since tens of thousands of folks have been killed already, use of chemical weapons would be off limits to the syrian regime right now. considering rebels have made advances that may be one of the most powerful weapons the government has in its arsenal rig
by the bush administration first, and then, of course, were increased by the obama administration. it's important to recognize that the eslc report is not political in any way, shape or form. it endorses things that are heartily supported by the right , in some cases, and on the other hand that are supported by people on the left. it's important to recognize you can't just take the parts that you like. you have to take the wholistic approach, which is to, again, maximize u.s. production and to at the same time significantly reduce consumption partly by diversifying our transportation sector away from petroleum. now, the last thing i'll say before we sit down is it's important to recognize that petroleum use in transportation is the pivot point of this entire problem. about 70% of our 18.7 million barrel per day use of petroleum in this country is for transportation, and transportation is fueled about 93% of the time by petroleum. so if you want to reduce the united states' dependence on imported petroleum and the related geopolitical issues that that causes, particularly in an era whe
to a kr credible location. >> and the obama administration is saying what the united nations did unilaterally was a setback. do you agree with that? the body i represent is split. some people are in favor of the u.s. vote. the truth of it, the only thing that will work to deliver a palestinian state side-by-side with a secure state of israel is peace. as you can see we have a chance now. the president has been re-elected. i know he's deeply personally committed to this and we just have to regrip it, i'm afraid. >> what's gone wrong? >> it's partly because there's so much turmoil in the region right now. it's how each side views its own prospects. >> how would you characterize a credible negotiation given the fact as long as we've been alive there's been these problems that keep erupting and never, ever get solved? we've been trying for 20, 30 years. it was 50, 60 years before we got one that worked. and actually back in the year 2000, and again in 2008, you have no option in the end. the only thing that works is to make it credible if we shape the negotiations. give it some shape
the number of permits during the obama administration's first term and there will be a price to pay in our energy costs over the next four years. we hear people saying over and over and over again, americans must pay their fair share. the rich must pay their fair share. everyone must pay their fair share and on that i am in 100% agreement with our president, with leader reid at the other end of this building, with my friends across the aisle, democrats here who want everybody to pay their fair share, i'm in 1 pun% agreement. we -- 100% agreement. we absolutely should do that. make everybody pay their fair share. lots of folks use the metaphor, let's make sure everybody has some skin in the game. well, if you really want to have everyone pay their fair share, there is an easy answer and fortunately it would drive this economy to brand new heights, it would drive this country and our economy to a new economic renaissance. it would be incredible and all of our friends around the country who are suffering, who don't have even $3 a gallon to pay for gasoline, it would help them when they can't
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5